LESSWRONG
LW

All of vmatyi's Comments + Replies

Explaining “Hell is Game Theory Folk Theorems”
vmatyi30

Why is this strategy profile a Nash equilibrium? Because no player is better off deviating from this strategy profile, assuming all other players stick to the strategy profile.

Only if we limit thinking to 1 round at a time. But thinking longer term: anyone changing to 30 (end being punished for it), immediately changed the landscape for everyone else: punishment reached it's maximum, from now on everyones' incentive is to lower theirs for immediate reward. And knowing that and thinking ahead at least two rounds, players are better off deviating, thus they would. Or at least they should.

Reply
3Ericf
The definition of Nash equilibrium is that you assume all other players will stay with thier strategy. If, as in this case, that assumption does not hold then you have (I guess) an "unstable" equilibrium.
Hell is Game Theory Folk Theorems
vmatyi11

Count me in : ) If we assume that there are at least two not-completely-irrational agents, you are right. And in case there aren't, I don't think the scenario qualifies as a "game" theory. It's just a boring personal hell with 99 unconscious zombies. But given the negligible effect of punishment, I'd rather keep my dial at 30 just to keep the hope alive, than surrendering to the "policy".

Reply
Green goo is plausible
vmatyi62

So at month8 the edge grows 0.46 m/s. That doesn't sound very plausible to me.
In this timeline the area doubles about every week, so all the growth must happen in two dimensions (opposed to the corns weight gain), it couldn't get thicker. It means it's bandwidth for nutrient transport would not change, thus it couldn't support the exponential growth on the edges.
(although as between month2 and month3 it took a break of growth, some restructuring might have happened)

Reply
2anithite
First, more patches growing from different starting locations is better. That cuts required linear expansion rate proportional to ratio of (half earth circumference,max(dist b/w patches)) Note that 0.46 m/s is walking speed. two layer fractal growth is practical (IE:specialised spikes grow outwards at 0.46m/s initiating slower growth fronts that cover the area between them more slowly.) Material transport might become the binding constraint but transport gets more efficient as you increase density. Larger tubes have higher flow velocities with the same pressure gradient. (less benefits once turbulence sets in). Air bearings (think very long air hockey table) are likely close to optimal and easy enough to construct. As for biomass/area. Corn grows to 10Mg/ha = 1kg/m² for a kilometer long front that implies half a tonne per second. Trains cars mass in the 10s to hundreds of tonnes. assuming 10 tonnes and 65' that's half a tonne per meter of train. So move a train equivalent at (1m/s+0.5m/s) --> 1.5m/s (running speed) and that supplies a kilometer of frontage. There's obviously room to scale this. I'm also ignoring oceans. Oceans make this easier since anything floating can move like a boat for which 0.5m/s is not significant speed. Added notes: I would assume the assimilation front has higher biomass/area than inner enclosed areas since there's more going on there and potentially conflict with wildlife. This makes things trickier and assembly/reassembly could be a pain so maybe put it on legs or something?